Printable View
Hi all,
Have not played since around patch 6 or 7. I just couldnt get immersed, I would start a campaign play 10-15 turns go do something else and never come back.
So how does the game play now? do I need to play Ceaser in Gaul or Hannibal at the gates or is the basic game much more improved now/have they fixed a lot of the major bugs?
Is the Pirates and Raiders DLC worth it?
let me know your thoughts
Cheers Knoddy
The short answer: you can't patch what's wrong with R2
I played my Barcid campaign to military victory last night [my first RTW 2 campaign I actually played to the end]. It was fun for the first 50-75 turns with things hanging in balance. After that: the usual steam-roll.
What kept me engaged was playing and experimenting with Carthaginian mercenary roster, LOL.
In general, despite that mid-game-on steamroll, I have to say, the grand campaign has improved a lot since the release.
Here's a peak at the end-of-campaign map. As you can see there are a few larger AI states (which was unusual around patches 5-7).
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
As to raiders' pack. I'd buy it only if you want to play with those factions (which can be achieved with mods anyway). All 3 have a challenging start.
My instincts on game quality are driven entirely by what I feel compelled to play, based on that, I can't recommend the GC for R2.
Because since its release I forced myself to slog through one GC under the original victory conditions, which btw were just completely stupid, it was just short of a requiring to conquer the entire map. Once that was done I've played and enjoyed both DLC's more than the GC, so thumbs up to HaTG and CIG.
But currently if you look at my steam play time you'd see I'd rather play R1 EB, MTW2 vanilla or under any mod or Shogun 2 over R2 GC.
That's how I rate games, do I play them. I've got limited amounts of time just like anyone working to allocate to gaming, given it's a limited resource, where I choose to use it says everything I have to say about how I feel about a recently released game. In this case it would sum up this way: I'd rather play games that released a decade ago.
The game to me is generally a throwback to Age of Empires II (which I also play). Survive the first few assaults and when those are over steam roll the competition.
After a certain point the AI seems to be content to puppy guard their forts and not form any kind of offensive.
The reason I still play is that I enjoy the real time battles. The tactician in me needs the high.......
thanks for the replies, I might see if I can get back into it. to the point about getting to a point where you steam roll, this is like nearly every strategy game out there, at some point your so big that it hardly matters what the AI does but I do take your point.
I'd say it's fun if you deliberately choose factions you are not familiar with. Get out of your comfort zone, and find out how to make them work. Are you a Roman/Greek kind of guy? Play Royal Scythia or the Massagetae. Are you an Iceni guy who likes camping the British Isles? Go Bactria or the Seleukids. Then, ti's a matter of finding the right opening moves (when to fight, what to conquer, whom to ally with). But once you've gotten that and have gotten a 4 settlement province that can recruit tier 3 units, then it's pretty much starting to get stale.
About the ally thing. Ive found it increasingly hard to get any kind of alliances. Even with overwhelming love from another faction they never want to do more than NAP me. Its rather annoying.
How far along are you with your campaign? It gets easier to get alliances as you grow stronger. Also, beat-up AI factions (victims of other AIs) tend to be very willing to ally with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamakazi
Unless your faction has diplomatic malus, it is not that hard to get allies even in the early games. I frequently need to offer the AI to join their wars, etc. though; sometimes a little cash.
The usual sequence is:
NAP, trade, military access, defensive alliance.
The second one is problematic with some factions which are hard-coded (or so it seems) to avoid trading.
I'd say the patch changes to R2's diplomacy have made the biggest difference - particularly to mid/late campaign. My most recent campaigns as Rome and Bactria have ended (or I parachuted out) with me a senior partner in a domminant grand alliance. I find this makes the mid/late game more measured than Shogun 2's, but also less contrived than the scripted Realm Divide solo romp.
Over the last few months I've found myself playing a fair bit of R2 as well as S2 and Napoleon (NTW3 mod). I think of all 3, I find R2's diplomacy the best (boy am i surprised to write that!), simply because it is consistent and (in my experience) devoid of the glitches in empire/NTW's (one turn trade agreemnts) and eschews the realm divide dog-pile which makes an utter mockery of alliances and vassals (even if you set them up after RD begins, they are bound to rebel).
In R2 (at present) you can avoid a fair ammount of grinding that was otherwise unavoidable, because the victory conditions include allied territory in your province count. I find alliances fairly easy to form, as they start taking shape in the early/mid game, around common enemies and trade agreemetns. The AI diplomacy indicators work very predictably in that a series of mutual freinds and enemies, as well as long running agreements, will usually snowball into political blocs across the map. The tricky points with this feature are: 1) getting into such alliances to start with, 2) preserving enough space (enemies/neutrals) for you to expand without torpedoing your grand alliance (or at least doing so tiddily). R2's approach to diplomacy mechanics makes so much rational sense but does of course lend itself to ruthless exploitation by the player - I'm sadly yet to see an AI backstab me as they would do in Shogun 2. In a context without the realm divide hysterics, S2's campaign AI and diplomacy might be better, but as it is i think I prefer R2s and in that context, R2 is marginaly more satisfying for me.
I just got the Pirates and Raiders DLC so Ill post some reviews soon, see how the game changed.
I never had no trouble with realm divide. I knew how to mange it, I understood why it happened, I knew when it would happen, and I knew what to do about it.
I've had on numerous occasions allies who stayed that way post RD till I had won. I've had hundreds of vassals stay on my side that I created post RD.
All those who would declare themselves worthy of becoming Shogun should prove it in Total War. :bow:
R2 on the other hand, I've got dozens of people who can't be bothered to trade or talk to me for the entire campaign, to say that "it works" as well or better than S2 diplo baffles me
I played about an hour. Just started a Getae campaign (and AAR forthcoming) and it seems to be working smoother than the last time I seriously played, which was I think back in December. I felt that battles went a bit better. Less of the "accordion effect" when two units collide. Cant comment on campaign strategy yet or diplomacy. I also have a slew of mods, ranging from Radious's mods to camera mods. But the one which stands out for me is the Rome 1 music mod. Holy hell its amazing, really makes battles so much better, I highly recommend it. Will post more comments as I continue to re-experience the game.
OK, so I really will have to track this music mod down. I've never run a mod on R2, is there much to it?
No its very easy! Just go to the Rome 2 workshop page on Steam, search for music, find the Rome 1 music mod, it will be at the top because its very popular, and simply press subscribe. Steam does the rest. And just to be sure when you fire up the launcher, go to the mod manager and make sure that the mod is enabled. Then press launch, and you are good to go!
Ah, much better now...~;)
Really? I can honestly say I've never managed to do that - hence my sense that at RD everyone simply goes mad (with some reason and empirical evidence). It would make total war a little less total if I could setup vassal buffer states... Did you have to do anything other than be friendly/allied for a long time? i.e. bribe them every turn? I must return to the Dojo and focus on my lessons. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
I think in R2 the system struggles when there aren't many indicators racking up on either side (be it like/dislike), as the AI can be quite complacent. In some cases you might be able to sweaten a deal (the initial one most importantly perhaps - to get the "likes" ratcheting up) with a bribe but it's fair to say that unless you follow the progression of agreements that Slaists mentions, the AI won't be interested.Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
Starting relationships off seems the hardest part in R2. I'd say it's also rare that erstwhile enemies become friends/allies. Often the easiest way to be start building a friendly relationship with a faction is to have mutual enemies, declaring war (as a diplomatic measure alone!) is always possible: no one can say "no".
I'd say you'll always have factions miles away who are disinterested in you and maybe minor factions with not much to trade too. Generaly, a large AI faction (with trade resources) will be happy to trade once you are friendly enough.
Well, the vassal part is really pretty straightforward, you just turn them after RD. I do it because once RD starts I lose all my trade partners and need a revenue stream. But I also vassalize because I don't have to leave an army behind to stabilize it and I don't have to waste money fixing the place back up. It's almost comical they give me a unit for free to boot.Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
That said, these guys will not stay with you forever, so you better be primed with your army for a medium speed blitzkrieg and have a plan of attack where you are going. This is not a casual walk in the park, it's Sherman heading to the sea. Since I often start this push in the immediate vicinity of Kyoto because I hold off taking that till after RD kicks in, I do also create a decent size standing army there that can "persuade" vassals that change their mind to come back into the fold.
As for allies that stayed with me post RD, that one is also pretty straightforward, but it does require a bit of planning and some luck. Early on in the campaign you have to pick who you are going to trade with and stick with for the long term, if you choose wisely and select one of the clans that tends to survive to the end having been with them in an alliance for the entire campaign they will hold out for awhile post RD. Like the vassal strategy above, time is not on your side, you do need to get on it once RD kicks in.
Which is why the last part of the strategy to handle RD involves moving right up to the line where it kicks in (watch fame) and stopping short to prepare, collect some money and build armies, so the final push can be one constant effort. And yes, bribing does help forestall losing vassals or allies, but ultimately only for awhile. Money though it always a handy thing to have, so it is good to have a pile handy, I love buying a stack from the enemy as a recruitment mechanism once the push is on.
Ok, well, I'll try and just be patient about this, but so far in the campaign this is the pattern I see. Whenever I encounter anyone new the starting position they assume is hostile. And I can't establish trade with them to demonstrate I'm OK, the small or even medium size bribes I offer (I'm not swimming in money here as it's the early part of the campaign) make no difference, they give me their same stupid speeches (which btw I find 100x more annoying than anything I've ever been exposed to a thousand times in a TW game).Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
So, I've got a dozen or so people I could carry on diplomacy with and NONE of them will even talk to me. This game mechanic at the point I'm at initially in this campaign is as broken as the politics module I completely ignore with no consequence. At least in S2 the clans started with the assumption initially I should not be immediately hated and I traded with just about everyone I encountered at the outset, then as events advanced I and others showed their true colors and things would unravel with some and strengthen with others.
I don't get it. If I'm to participate in the game through these systems by making choices, hopefully meaningful ones, I have to be allowed to do something, I can't get these guys to even talk to me.
Is this a Rome campaign? I think i've experienced the same, at least especially to start with - particularly from the barbarians to the north, east, west and south, er, everyone bar Syracuse... Things are at their worst at the beginning because everyone is (mostly) neutral.Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
Start a war with someoneDo some Clausewitzian diplomacy and their enemies should be friendly to you.
Thanks - that's actually what I have seen and experienced. But for me, given the eventual/inevitable betrayal and the time it takes to meet the victory tally for provinces (I prefer long campaigns) I actually find it easier to do without bad allies.Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
I prep up to the line for RD, but then try to ensure post RD battles and the main effort takes place on Honshu, as an irressistable wave moving up/down the island - culminating around Kyoto. I try to have at least 1 army per road/route and guard the flanks at sea with navies to prevent landings in my rear, which avoids having reserve stacks and allows me to focus on the front. I find vacilating allies/vassals and their trade would only complicate the issue and the cost of defense against them would outweigh the revenue which they'd generate.
Yes, this is our dear friends the Romans, or to my neighbors, the guy everyone loves to hate. Ok, duly noted, start some wars, make some enemies, enemy of my enemy is my friend. I'm busy down south working to kick Carthage off the map, that will of course instantly put me at war w/ their two proxies. And for good measure the Greeks decided to throw down the gauntlet, first Sparta for no reason, then Athens just because Sparta did.Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
So if the key to friends is making enemies I'm well on my way to collecting a raft load of Christmas cards come the holidays.
More than one way to skin a cat, which is why these games are fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
That said, I think at least one campaign you should try it my way. You only need 2 maybe 3 stacks. Remember, my way no one is left behind to guard anything, so no resources militarily are lost no matter how many provinces you take or how fast you take them. I can easily take half a dozen a year this way. And if I'm at all elegant about my planning and leave a vassal an opening, they take provinces too. There's no cost to defense here, this is all offense with trade partners created just as a freebie side benefit.
And there are no bad allies, because really there are no allies in TW in the traditional sense of the word, there are only allies of temporary convenience.
When your ultimate goal is the subjugation of the map, everyone is simply part of my plan
Early mid and late game I have the same problem. The only real option I get is client state offers after im almost done killing off a factionQuote:
Originally Posted by Slaists
I have no problem doing diplomacy with anyone after it all kind of takes off and goes into the mid game.. The downside is, if I overdo it, it kind of looks like this after 60-80 turns.
Defensive alliance XXX
Client State XXXXXX
Trade Partner XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
War XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
You end up getting into so many wars with factions you will probably never see because there is like a continent of client states/allies between you and them.
I look forward to the point in the campaign where everyone in the diplo screen is not staring back at me red.
You should try playing a greek faction which likes greeks. That way you'll have loads of friends around the pelopolynese. I was about to recommend Bactria but they have the small (small) problem of having to fight through most of Asia to find their friends...Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
With Rome, I've found that if I can sign NA pacts with Sparta and Athens, I usually end up being friendly/allied with them. Especially as one ends up focussing on Carthage and North Africa to begin with. Obviously, if the Greek cities have already declared war on you then, er, that won't work... Look to Carthage's enemies (if they have any) for friendships. In a few of my campaigns, they have started wars with the Arrevacii (the gauls), so providing youc an stomach friendship with the long haired ones, they have at times been solid friends of mine in Rome campaigns.
You can achieve this with any faction. Just don't declare war on everyone the moment you see them and take diplomacy into account when you start conquering things. Attack people who are at war with people who are friendly to you. Offer to join wars (some factions pay a lot of money for this). That sort of stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
Seriously, do you really think I declared war on everyone and that's the reason I'm pointing this out? :no:
You ARE in a Rome campaign, right? :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by easytarget
Edit: allthough IRL of course the Roman's only started, ahem, legal wars